linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] spi: Ensure that CS line is in non-active state after setup

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHp75VcVqbiYWvBkcZrp7wwVjjfNO_S75am=9KCJ_cOWja5BJw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 9 Mar 2015 14:11:45 +0200
From:	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:	"Ivan T. Ivanov" <iivanov@...sol.com>
Cc:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] spi: Ensure that CS line is in non-active state after setup

On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:11 AM, Ivan T. Ivanov <iivanov@...sol.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2015-03-08 at 20:01 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 05:45:15PM +0200, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote:
>>
>> >         if (spi->master->setup)
>> >                 status = spi->master->setup(spi);
>> > +       else
>> > +               spi_set_cs(spi, false);
>>
>> Why would this be conditional on there not being a setup operation?
>> It's a good idea, I just don't see why the backstop isn't always useful.
>
> I was thinking that this is expected to be handled inside
> setup operation, nothing more.

Agree with Mark. It's perhaps a good idea to call unconditionally
before ->setup().


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/